Monday, December 30, 2013

Last summer - my neighbors, living two doors away - very nice people, but particularly enthusiastic Christians were in their backyard having a small get-together. I was walking home from Walgreens through the alley, they saw me passing, and invited me over. After I had dropped my items off at home - I came by, and was generally enjoying myself. They announced to their friends that I was the "Neighborhood Atheist" (maybe that's why they invited me) - but to my surprise, they were cool, reasonable and curious. I engaged in some interesting, and possibly productive dialogue with their guests. Most of them seemed to be well-educated, and they asked good, well thought-out questions (And, unlike what some Christians irritatingly do when you attempt to dialogue - this group politely allowed me to answer their questions without them shouting at me while I was speaking, or cutting me off before I could finish my statements. I must praise them sincerely for their very un-Christian like behavior).

Food was available, the offerings included chicken wings, hamburgers, and rib tips. My neighbor's wife graciously prepared a plate for me that included rib tips. I did not want to waste any food, so I informed her that "I cannot eat the rib tips." She was a bit surprised - she said: "I know you are an Atheist, you a Muslim too?" I intimated that I do not eat them for health reasons (which is the truth). She took the plate, removed the rib tips, and everything was cool (and tasty). The other guests were eating those rib tips with extreme relish, and informing me that: "You don't know what you are missing!" In actuality - I do know what I am "missing;" I used to eat pork, and believe me, I know it tastes great. I had to let it go in my early twenties because I was developing adult-onset diabetes. I did not want to be tethered to medication for the rest of my life, or lose a limb, or go blind (a progressive eye condition called "diabetic retinopathy"). My girlfriend at the time suggested that I stop eating pork, and severely cut-back or eliminate dairy products and sugar from my diet. I did this, and after seven clear months, my diabetes backed-off and disappeared. I now limit my consumption of dairy to the occasional pizza, I will have the occasional soda, and I do not touch pork at all.

When I was transitioning away from pork - I did some research about it. For food use, it is pretty hairy. I would include pork on any list of hazardous substances. It is quite toxic to the human body, this is not from a religious standpoint, it just is. The red flag for most people should be the fact that you have to be even more extra-careful in the handling, preparation, and cooking of pork, than any other animal product. For example; on the rare occasions that I eat red meat (beef and lamb), I prefer my meat cooked medium, with just a little pink inside. Can't do that with pork - you better cook the shit out of that piece of meat, or you may be playing roulette with your life. There is too much potentially negative shit health-wise with pork for anybody to mess with that is truly interested in maintaining good health.

This is a partial list of the bullshit you can get from eating pork:

1. Yersenia Enterocolitica - this bacterium can send you to the hospital with bloody diarrhea.

2. Salmonella Enterica - this is straight-up food poisoning. Symptoms can include; fever, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, stomach cramps, and muscle aches. The presence of this bacteria in some people can be fatal.

3. Staphylococcus Aureus - infections from this bacterial agent can be severe and deadly. This virulence can infect your heart valves, and give you a tenaciously persistent form of pneumonia.

7. Tania Solium - or "Pork Tapeworm," an actual worm, this is a major cause of epilepsy in humans.

And the big one...

8. Trichinella Spiralis - trichinosis can be fatal from worms entering the central nervous system. Ultimately, death can be caused by a stroke, acute myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle), encephalitis, or pneumonia.

This is a pretty nasty list. The fact that this [pork] can give you "bloody diarrhea" if somebody lapses in the way they handle this shit should cause any THINKING PERSON some pause before they decide to eat it. And again, this is not the entire list of things that eating pork can cause.

Now, I always will have a ton of negative things to say about the Bible. Because it is negative. But - in order to be a good Atheist, one must also be fair... The Biblical prohibition against pork was extremely good advice. Why was this prohibition put in place? Is it possible that folks in ancient Palestine understood a cause and effect relationship between eating pork and certain illnesses? Was there too much of a societal cost to allow its continued consumption (a public health issue)? And they decided to use authoritative means to stop it? OK... Makes sense to me.

So, why is it that so many Christians eat pork? Why do they blow past the prohibitions? Because - when you look in your Bible, God makes a couple of pretty strong no-no's when it comes to eating pork - like:

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you" (Leviticus 11:7-8 KJV).

And..."And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase"(Deuteronomy 14:8 KJV).

Now, we must point out that these verses were allegedly spoken directly out of the mouth of God. No "inspiration" through a "messenger." No third parties. And the information that was expended is totally unambiguous. These verses cannot be read other than literally. And in the case of the verses extracted from Leviticus, those verses are from the same part of the Bible that prohibits homosexuality. Good Christians seem to have no problems enforcing God's suggested penalties that are attached to the prohibitions regarding homosexual behavior. But when it comes to eating pork chops? "Oh - um (cough), didn't Jesus change all that?" Could this be a bald-faced case of scriptural "picking and choosing?"

A biblical salad bar? Just asking...

When I was growing up in Chicago, during the 1960's and 70's - anytime a Black person stated that he did not eat pork, folks would immediately ask if he was a "Mooslim," and if he was not, he was looked upon as some kind of weird outlier - "What's up with him?" If you were a Black Christian - you were fucking EXPECTED to eat pork, because if you didn't, there was "something wrong" with you. That's how it was. But then, in my latter-day studies of the Holy Bible, I developed a curiosity as to how Christians got around this quite, quite obvious restriction, because Jesus himself (quite obviously) certainly did not make the change, as you can see:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven"(Matthew 5:18-19 KJV).

You will find me using Matthew 5:18-19 KJV a lot in future posts, this is because I consider it to be Jesus' main, irrefutable liturgical and doctrinal "bridge" between the Old and New Testaments. Now - as you read the remainder of this post, I want you to especially keep in mind the part of Matthew 5:18-19 where Jesus says: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven..." Now, focus on the word "Whosoever" -from a dictionary correct standpoint, the pronoun "Whosoever" would also include Jesus himself... Right? And of the "commandments" that Jesus is indicative of, I think we could safely assume that he is talking about only those rules issued by GOD himself - Right? OK... As you read on folks, keep that "Whosoever" word in mind please... "Whosoever" - OK?

We also have JESUS stating:"Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law?"(John 7:19 KJV)
Would the "Law" in a singular or "plural" sense include the entirety of all of "The Five Books" in the Pentateuch, those books that were allegedly authored by the religiously great, spiritually-connected Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy)? And would the "Law" in the aggregate sense, describe EACH of the permissions and prohibitions asserted in those writings? Now, let us use SOME literal sense folks...

Would ALL of those clear and direct permissions and prohibitions literally INCLUDE the dietary ones as well? OK...

Now - back to JESUS...

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail [than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid]"(Luke 16:17 KJV).And...

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill" (Matthew 5:17 KJV).

Parenthesis Please!!!

(I know the wording of Matthew 5:17 seems a bit nonsensical - but I have checked and re-checked several print King James Bible translations and online Bibles to confirm, and yes, that is the accurate rendering.)

So it wasn't Jesus that allows you [churchgoer] to serve ham sandwiches and Jell-O (gelatinized, fruit-flavored pork) to the little kids in the church fellowship hall. Again folks, it wasn't Jesus. The guy that had allegedly opened-up the reason to invent mild-sauce was (the faith-conflicted and emotionally disturbed) Saint Peter, with two, weird, off-track passages:

"And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance. And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common"(The Acts 10:10-15 KJV).And..."I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean"(Epistle to the Romans 14:14 KJV).

So, according to most Christian scholars, apologists, spiritual hustlers, and well-educated clergy, these are the two scriptures that "abolished" the prohibition on eating pork - despite the fact that God himself said not to, and despite the fact that these two scriptures are not precisely messaged in any useful way. This is interesting... Now, scripturally, and within this post; we have two strong, literal, and unambiguous prohibitions expended directly out of the mouth of God; we have four quite clearassurances from Jesus, that in no respect that the Old Testament permissions and prohibitions laid down by "The Father" and "The Prophets" were to ever be revoked by him; and then we have a full 180 degree turn on all of those strict, God-given dietary prohibitions by one off-track disciple of Jesus. Just like that. Wow... A disciple of Jesus was able to fuck with something that Jesus himself wouldn't? Or, could there be some kind of interpretational slight of hand in play here? COULD there be? OK... Folks - keep your mind of potential possibilities open.Now...

As we clearly see in reading The Acts 10:10-15 KJV, this guy [Peter] is apparently "tripping" on or because of "something" (Can I get a hit?). "And there came a voice to him???" We have no literal wayof knowing if this "voice" was God himself, or possibly a wayward angel, or maybe even "The Devil." "A voice" that never gives its identity - and then we have Peter (whom is clearly not clear at this point) making an ASSUMPTION that he was hearing the voice of "The Lord." Really? Folks, please notice that when the "voice" spoke a second time, "Mr. Voice" speaks of God in the third person. Doesn't sound like a solid ID to me. But I can see these verses - in the hands of a skillful apologist, being utilized as a slick "workaround" to get around certain distasteful orders, clear commandments or divine prohibitions that some Christians might find "inconvenient."

This shit has gone on for centuries.If I were a Christian, it would seem to me that if you are talking about re-assigning, re-interpreting, amending or even possibly abolishing any commandment or prohibition that came directly out of the mouth of God, there would be a righteous demand for a much higher standard of proof than "a voice" (and a mere assumption of the source of that "voice"), before taking actions that could possibly take myself and fellow Christians straight to hell. God said directly: "Don't even touch the fucking carcass dude..."But since the Apostle Peter heard "a voice" - everything's cool? Wait a minute... This seems improper on so many levels. This is like the United States Supreme Court issuing a ruling, but then some lower circuit or city court being able to reverse that same ruling for the whole country. It does not work that way, there is a certain "order," "procedure," and "jurisdiction" that is necessarily attached to these kinds of actions - so that there is workable universal agreement as to the rightness and/or constitutionality of a given ruling or law, and this practice is also in place to ensure top to bottom applicability of enforcement. That is why lower courts cannot "overturn" laws decided by a higher court unless a lower ruling has been "upheld" or kept in place by a higher court (this practice is called the "appeals" process). Those court rulings can then be appealed again, then as a result, amended, and/or "reversed" by the same court, or "upheld," or even possibly "overturned" by higher courts - not the other way around. The U.S. Supreme Court always has the DIRECT final say on all previous rulings decided by them and lower courts - and those rulings are based ultimately on their constitutionality (the highest authority). So folks, from that workable legal example, let us try this... A clear and unambiguous commandment from a particular authority source, demands a clear and unambiguous repeal from the same or higher authority. Does that make SOME sense Christians?
We also, in The Acts, have to deal with good ol' Peter having some kind of "vision(!?)." Now again, we don't know what brought on this "vision," if he were dreaming, or hallucinating, or possibly being high on something - we really don't know. But I suppose that if you are already hearing voices - you might as well have "a vision" too, just to complete the experience...

So, the scripture says...

"He (just) fell into a trance..." Now, I suppose, to some folks - "a trance" is serious business. But, I've never personally considered "a trance" to be a good source for reliable information... But, I don't know everything - OK? So, cut me some... OK? But, I would like to ask you folks: "When was the last time YOU acted upon supposedly serious information someone had given that was acquired while they were in "a trance?" Would you take seriously any recommendations given by your dentist; for example - he hasn't examined you in two years, but heknows exactly what dental work needs to be performed now. And he got this information, again - not from any direct examination, but from a flash he caught while he was "in a trance." I don't know: You, in the dentist's chair - mouth open - power drill going - guy in a trance... Doesn't sound like a good mix to me...

OK...

Well, how about this: The President, deciding through his capacity as the "Commander In Chief" to order 250,000 troops and nine warships to a place in the world where no hostilities toward the United States or any other country is occurring. He then explains, through a televised press conference that he sent those troops and ships because HE KNOWS "something is about to happen," and he only wanted to get ahead of that "something" before it occurs. The press asks: "Were your actions based on some new intelligence?" The President replies: "No - I got my warning through a visionI receivedwhile I wasin a trance, and from that vision, I knew I needed no other advisement or information to make that move, dearladies and gentlemen. So, I am having this press conference today, because I wanted the American people to know - that this order was not some arbitrary or impulsive action decisioned by me alone -A VOICE, told me to send out the troops - Now..."

Folks, how do you think the electorate, the press, the United Nations, our allies, those entities and individuals whom are politically in opposition to the President, the CIA, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the State Department, and the U.S. Congress, would deal with that one?

OK...

And Christians wonder why Atheists call the Holy Bible and Christianity inconsistent... Come on now - Peter??? This is the same guy that initially confessed Jesus as the Messiah, then put down (denied) Jesus on three separate occasions after Jesus' abrupt arrest by the Temple guards of The Sanhedrin. Jesus was cuffed by these nice folks at The Garden Of Gethsemane (Luke 22:39-47 KJV). Then, after the third put-down - Peter had another flash, and flipped again for the fifth time - then rushed to get his ass back on Jesus' team, just in time to passionately preach on the Day Of Pentecost, like nothing happened (The Acts 2:1-13 KJV)...

WOW... This is the go-to guy for diet advice? OK...

Now, I know that Peter has those applied titles of "Apostle" and "Saint." But, in the Christian hierarchy; wouldn't the word of Jesus, being "The Son Of God" take precedence over one of his apostles? Wouldn't "The Word Of God" take precedence over the word of Jesus? Jesus was pretty explicit about not fucking with that - you know, that "Word Of God" thing. You know? So, how did Peter get the authority to end-run Jesus, and then overturn "The Word Of God?" Romans 14:14 KJV reads like the kind of random ruminations that one might find in a diary, or on a legal pad one might use to capture certain thoughts that capriciously pop-up during the course of the day. So, he was "persuaded" by Jesus to go off God's script? A divine "mutiny," if you will? Sounds like either Peter is full of shit - or somebody else is... If I were a real Christian that actively studied the Bible, and therefore being a studiously serious follower of Jesus, that [Romans 14:14 statement] would be interpretively unacceptable to me, and it should be biblically suspect to anyone else.

Consider the alleged source dude!

Ol' crazy-assed, flippety-floppety Saint Peter.

OK..?

Sounds like a "play" to me. If I were a believer, I would say: "Any 'repeal' of 'The Word Of God' would have to come from Godhimself - or his directly appointed super-representative (Jesus), and not from some mentally unstable, 'apostolic underling' (like Peter), to righteously carry any real weight with me. I am now being especially reflective when it regards something as fragile and serious as my health." So what, if a divine repeal is said to be in the Bible by the lying professional multitudes (clergy) - any thing or agenda can be apostolically preached "between the verses." Any fucking meaning that you want can always be strategically well interpreted "between the lines." Don't be "dummified" folks... Understand that the naked literalness of the Bible is always the default position.

Christians always talk about "interpreting" and "misinterpreting" - this positive decision [not eating pork anymore], is a reasonable conclusion (not an "interpretation"), a literally valid correlation, that is based upon actual experience [demonstrable illness on my part], and the indirect, but correlated testing(!) of the alleged literal "Word Of God" - and not someone's unprincipled "interpretation." Thereby, making my illness go away - and it has to this day, stayed away.

In this particular case - "The Word Of God" has absolute validity.

I know that there are a lot of the "clean pig" apologists out there, and the things they say may be scientifically accurate about modern pork-handling practices. But I wonder if Peter ever spent any time in a spot where pigs were being raised (probably not). Was he angling for a way to legitimately sink his teeth into a thick, juicy pork chop - without offending "The Lord?" That, we cannot know (but Peter, being an observant Jew, that does not seem likely). Or - did somefuckingbody just straight-up LIE about Apostle Peter, claiming that he scripturally hallucinated into grace, an overturn of "God's Word" - thus, transforming a passing dream into "THE Word."
And if somebody DID lie - who the fuck was it?

Was it the Pope?

Was it the pork industry?

Maybe it was the fucking Tooth Fairy?

Who knows...

Understand folks, I would bet my own money, that if it were somehow possible to resurrect Peter, and subsequently question him on this quite scary matter (him allegedly making a revision or abolishment of "God's Word"). Hey man! I am telling you - I guarantee you... Our supposed revisor, the Apostle Peter, would not avow this - he would not know what the fuck you were talking about...

OK?

People - even if pigs are raised in "clean" conditions, and are fed "clean" foods, there is something about the basic "chemistry" of pork that makes it offensive to the human body, no matter what you do. It can be a major factor in the development of tumors, cancers, rheumatism, high-blood pressure, diabetes, gout, obesity, and stroke. Renal failure seems to be common with long-time pork eaters (possibly from the additional toxic load that the kidneys must then process as a result of sustained pork consumption). The divine prohibition against pork consumption was clear, no-nonsense, and actually pro-health. There are some people within the "healthy eating" community that think pork actually accelerates weight-gain, makes excess weight harder to lose, and produces an especially nasty and offensive body odor from some of its consumers (The best I can describe that odor is a mix of urine and stale mucus - and churchgoers put cologne on top of it - YUK!).

The same people also believe that the natural toxicity that pork possesses, actually enables and amplifies certain allergies that on the surface seem to be unrelated to pork consumption directly, such as an allergy to strawberries, for example. The "healthy" folks also believe that the daily consumption of pork will indelicately degrade one's physical appearance - pimply or blemished skin for example, and giving some eaters a "piggy" or "hoggish" presentation.

I call it: "The Gut Look."

And some ladies will put lipstick and a weave on top of that...

There are many Christians that are aware of the things that I am saying here. But most Christians say "fuck that" - even with the threat of hell-fire smoldering beneath that barbecue pit - bacon, ham, ribs, and pork chops are simply "too good" to give up, even if God says to do so: "Don't we live under 'grace' pastor? Can't we just pray over this, and let that be that?"

"Pass the ham please..."

As a child, I used to spend some spring breaks on my grand-auntie's farm in Alabama. She and my cousins had a generous spread, and they owned about 50 pigs. They are quite strange creatures; they are assertive, not shy in the least. Sometimes, they are almost humanly intelligent - they occasionally seem to know what you are thinking; they also seem to learn from mistakes faster than dogs. On the other hand - they [pigs] are the most indiscriminate and unrestrained when it came to what they will eat.

I have personally seen pigs do these things:

- They will eat the feces from other animals, and their own feces.

- They will drink urine - their own and others.

- They will eat their own stillborn piglets.

- I have seen them eat maggots off the carcasses of deceased animals.

- They are not afraid of snakes - they will attack and consume them.

- When bitten - snake bites do not seem to affect them.

- They will eat obviously infected flesh - dead or alive.

Sounds tasty, doesn't it? "Do-Do-licious," I call it. Again folks - pork is a hazardous substance. Seriously, if you have any real interest in staying healthy, looking your best, and slowing down the aging process, letting go of that nasty-assed pork is a good start. Funny though, it seems that Christians hate the truth, even if that truth comes from their own "holy and inerrant" book - "The Bible." Joel Osteen - yes HIM, the fucking mega-church TV pastor, told the truth about pork, and of his personal porkless eating habits in one of his sermons. The aftermath was funny as hell!!! Christians from all quarters unleashed a firestorm of negative criticism towards this man - FOR TELLING THE BIBLICAL TRUTH... Joel quickly realized that telling the biblical truth(!) fucks with the Christian Marketing Plan, so he strategically stopped giving to his congregation any real and useful information from that time forward.

"What the fuck you trying to do Joel - make your congregation think?"

This time - Joel Osteen was correct, and biblically on-point. This (eating pork) is just another excellent example of the kind of irritating arrogance that good Christians hypocritically piss onto the rest of the world... You know, exhorting you to believe some shit they can't even bring themselves to follow, with themselves being so highly selective about what they will follow, and this according to individual and/or denominational tastes. I will always remember that lady at a company picnic, telling me how much she loved God, all while she was chomping down on a steaming, stinking barbecued pork rib. I mean really - how do Christians expect others to take on "the faith," OK - if it is so literally clear (especially to those that are knowledgeable about, but outside the faith) that they themselves are not willing to be actual practitioners of some of the most here-and-now beneficial, and clearly articulated instructions, said directly from the mouth of God, that are found within their own "holy and inerrant" book?

But - you know what man... When it comes to exercising interpretational latitude over "The Word Of God," Christians are the ballsiest of all religious people on the face of the earth. Christianity, in real practice, is not about following "The Word." It is about deciding exactly what it is that YOU want to do, and then cherry-picking, modifying, and resetting "The Word" in such a way as to make it exactly fit one's personal or group agenda. Then - if anyone decides to call you on any bullshit you might be doing, you can confidently tell people where the mind of God is in reference to you. Case closed. No wonder there are so many Christians - it's so convenient!

That is why you could have a prominent member of the church choir, being able to piously demonstrate how she is blessed to be gifted with the mad skills she puts on display at the local strip club. Or, how it could be explained as part of "God's Plan" when the pastor's wife got caught giving the Youth Minister a blowjob.

You know - "Only GOD can judge ME!" - That bullshit...

Got it?

The basis of the doctrines that define a particular denomination will never include all verses within the Bible being given equal weight. "No pork? Ahh, well... We can skip-over that (Leviticus 11:7-8 KJV)." In contrast to this selective holy turnabout: "Johnny's GAY? You know what the Bible says about HOMOSEXUALITY!!! (Leviticus 18:22 KJV)." You see what I mean? Well, remember folks, Deuteronomy 14:8 KJV and Leviticus 11:7-8 KJV (again) are no-pork rules with no scriptural repeal said directly out of the mouth of God. Well, it is obvious how those are treated. A Christian denominational and/or individual Christian doctrinal basis consists entirely of what pointed and specified biblical passages to turn-up, turn-down, ignore, equivocate, overwrite, modify, spotlight, cover-up, re-modify, turn-around, interpret, re-interpret, re-purpose, and in what places to stick in stuff that is not even written in the Bible.

Like December 25th being Jesus' birthday... You know.

"Joel Osteen - who the fuck is he?" Let me tell you, if God himself decided to pick-up his divine megaphone and repeat to the entire world - at the same time - right now: "Motherfuckers - STOP EATING PORK!!!" Some Christian would look up, and tell Godthat he is misinterpreting himself:

Sunday, December 1, 2013

"[Christians, please!] Read your bibles and holy books. One of Atheism's biggest problems [with Christians] is that not enough Christians read their Bibles. This allows preachers to interpret the Bible's contents as they see fit because nobody who owns what they claim to think is the 'perfect word of God' can actually bring themselves to read it. It's no mystery why so few believers actually read their Bibles. They are afraid that if they did, they would understand how flawed [a document] it really is. In short, ignorance of their own Bibles keeps Christians Christian and empowers crooked preachers and politicians to do as they see fit, without challenge, in the name of God, with parishioners' money. Indeed, Christians who don't read their Bibles are allowing religious freedom to be endangered, hurting themselves and their country on the whole."

David Silverman -

American Atheist Magazine, 4th Qtr 2013 - Pg. 8NOTE: This post is a transcription of a recording. This is me - Arthur, talking, raw and uncut - not writing. Me and four other guys were at my house having a discussion that was fueled by hot wings, cognac, and beer. This is why the narrative is kinda "jerky," inconsistent and profane. Questions were being asked, some of those questions were worked into the transcription to make it flow better. Most of the Biblical citations and other attributions were added later for clarity.

PART ONE:

"Through these [words] he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires."

2Peter 1:4 NIV

I am what you might call a "Bible Atheist." My first verbal eruption that there was something profoundly wrong in Christian America, occurred in the summer of August 1966, I was eleven years old at the time, and Martin Luther King Jr. was campaigning in Chicago for open housing and the desegregation of all neighborhoods in the city. On the fifth of August - a march was staged through an all-white neighborhood in the city. King and his group was met with the usual (at the time) race-fueled hostility. Flying bricks, bottles, rocks - "Nigger! Nigger! Nigger!" - etc. King was blasted in the head with a nice fat rock. That nice fat rock knocked him dead on his ass. The proceedings were televised, and we were intently watching - he said: "I have seen many demonstrations in the South, but I have never seen anything so hostile and so hateful as I've seen here today."

Wow...

From things that I have seen and heard in church, things that I have seen and experienced in society, independently turning over in my mind what I received from certain sermons in my grandmother's church - I had been developing all kinds of doubts about Christianity, Jesus, God... Salvation, segregation, and lynching - with taxes? A Christian country? Jesus loves you? Niggers? OK... Something was not adding up. I had been harboring these doubts for at least a year, but I never said anything. After the Reverend King made his statement, I turned to my grandmother and said: "Gran, why does God only help white people?" She said: "What? Baby, I know that's what it looks like, but God has a reward for folks that keep the faith! What you looking at is the Devil, not God - OK?" She then put her hand on my head, and started "speaking in tongues." In order to "keep the peace," I just said: "OK" - and kept it moving by changing the subject. You know?

That following Sunday, after services, one of the "elder ladies" of the church pulled me to the side and began to question me about my doubts. She asked, "have you been praying for understanding?" I said: "No." She said: "No wonder!!! You haven't been reading your Bible, have you?" I had to admit, I had not read it at all, I just went by what the preacher said. "Well - you should read it, it will straighten you out!!!" I said, "OK, I will." I don't think she realized that I would actually do it. But I'm glad she asked, because reading the Bible in its entirety, is what made me a hard-core Atheist. It took me twenty months, because I was not just reading it; I was studying and cross-referencing, and compiling notes on it, and THINKING.

One must remember that this was done before the internet, Post-Its, and Hi-Lighters. By the time I finished Book number 66(!) of the "King James Version" (Revelation), I was done with Christianity.

FINISHED

When I started, from page 1 (Genesis), till the day I closed the book on the very last page - page 1834 (Revelation), I newly encountered a dismal world of incomparable weirdness. Reading onward, I never found much that was useful there. It wasn't entirely bad. A few pieces here and there of actual wisdom. There was some great poetry - beautiful stuff - and I found some stand-alone gems regarding goodwill and human relations that are actually more useful taken out of context. The divine prohibitions against eating pork in the books of Isaiah, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy are good to follow if you'd like to maintain good health.

But I also found a lot of stuff that simply was not true or logical. Whole chapters, and entire sections that are simply not usable in this modern world. Hundreds of strong statements established - and then hundreds of strong statements clearly made that directly contradict those that were previously established, being done with no clarifying or qualifying explanations. Those contradictory statements are just made and placed - they sit there with no clear and definitive repeals or nullifications of the statements they contradict. You follow this one OR you follow that one. The "which one" to follow seems to be dependent upon denominational and/or individual tastes. There are no actual - I mean no literal workable connections or bridges between those contradictions to make a whole, sensible, and coherent unity of "The Word" as an entirety. If this "Word" is meant for "all mankind" - we are seriously talking about a necessary but missing universal applicability issue here folks. That's a problem. "The Word Of God" containing contradictory statements? At all? That's an astonishing problem.

Seeing this, is when I began to understand why - and why there can be, so manydenominations and sects of Christianity. Denominations are created between the spaces of the contradictions.

Also, I made long and troubling notes on the fact that a lot of important existential stuff was missing, like the correct explanations for gravity, water, light, quantum physics, organic chemistry, weak force, strong force, electromagnetism, and DNA - those are "creation essentials" dude - and with God allegedly being the "originating scientist" - the fucking "creator". OK? And with us human beings having the full capability to understand the proper information - that stuff needs to be in there.

Nothing there.

Why did mankind have to wait thousands of years for Einstein to come on the scene and explain E=mc squared and the true nature of space-time? OK? Which would have been a necessary descriptive piece in any correct explanation of creation? OK? The speed of light? Explaining Dark Matter? Or - Dark Energy? Metallic hydrogen? Yes - "The Creator" should have covered all this. OK? How did my geology textbook from grammar school not mention anything about "The Great Flood?" Is it because this alleged event cannot be verified scientifically? Is it because we cannot find ANY corroborating geological evidence? Why? Christians? This did happen - Right? What is a star? Well, the Bible says they can fall from the sky - that's what it says (Revelation 8:10 KJV).

Did the Bible writers even understand what a star is?

Disease is caused by demons (Matthew 10:1 KJV)?

What happened to germ theory? - "Demon Theory" instead? Okay.

Did God forget that germs were part of his creation as well?

The world is flat (Revelation 7:1 KJV)? Is it?

A lot of stuff is there that outrages any sense of operational morality; a lot of stuff that if put into practice would be dangerously uncivilized, and - a lot of stuff that is so opposite to any concept of a quality life, that it is understandable why most Christians of today ignore many of the most unworkable and unreasonable parts of the Bible ("Do not wear clothes of wool and linen [or any two fibers] woven together" - Deuteronomy 22:11 KJV - "Silk and wool suit Pastor - huh?").

The problem is that there are no repealing statements anywhere in the Bible for not doing the most heinous or nonsensical stuff anymore (like slavery, stoning, misogyny, or killing gays). The Holy Bible is so open-ended, contradictory and disjointed that anyone with a plan or agenda can merely "interpret" into existence any kind of doctrinal set up that he wants - and could actually back it up with good biblical justification if anyone decides to call him on his bullshit. As of tonight, like right now, there are 41,626 different sects and denominations of Christianity that have all allegedly been, OK - "revealed" into existence just in America - devoted to, I will presume, the ONE God... OK? But - if you notice, every other sect and/or denomination, will point at every other sect and/or denomination, and say that those followers, that belong to every other sect and/or denomination - are going to hell, because God said so.

The Bible - hell, God himself, OK? Literally leaves us all denominationally hanging, and thusly, scripturally directionless, with not onedefinitive passage, or verse(s) that would lead any of us to join the one "right" church (if there is one). So here we have dude, 41,625 chances (and more) to go to hell - if we choose to congregate at "this church," rather than "that church," or "that church" - or "that church."

"The Lord" needs to do a conference call...

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1Corinthians 1:10 KJV).OK, cool... But at which church should or would this "perfect joining" take place? What denomination is scripturally appropriate to facilitate our being appropriately - denominationally - specifically - "in the same mind and in the same judgment?"

"Come on Paul... What's the address?"

And, the Bible is not time-specific at all - nor is it intended to be - it's just open: For example,The New Testament gives us this:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:18 KJV).

OK - how long will that "all be" take?

Bible says we're in the "Last Days" - Right?

What day is that "last day" (2Timothy 3:1-5 KJV)?

What?!? - OK...

Not much room for interpretation either:

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation" (2Peter 1:20 KJV).

No "private interpretation" - huh?

So what is your pastor or priest talking about? Isn't he "interpreting" in that pulpit? Giving HIS "take" on scripture? How HE feels? This verse means - NO interpretation of the scripture. All he is supposed to do, if anything, is read any verse aloud, and shut the fuck up. I own twelve Bibles* - I read them all to myself - and I keep my mouth shut (as far as interpreting anything). Why would I need to listen to him? A clergyman? Do you really need to go to church for that? And give up money? Can you do that yourself?

Is the Bible "God's Word" - or the pastor's?

"The Sabbath" is another example of what I mean by "unworkable and unreasonable:" How many Christians are out there that work on "The Sabbath," and that know other Christians that work on "The Sabbath?" What about the restaurants many Christians go to after services? Well, according to the Bible, the penalty for the waiters and the cooks is death (Numbers 15:32-36 KJV). Right? Are you flagging that waiter to take your order? Really dude? According to the Bible, you are supposed to be killing that waiter - not giving him your order (Exodus 31:15 KJV).

Aren't you?

Well... Yeah dude - the Holy Bible has no exceptions for restaurant personnel working on the Sabbath. It ain't in there. How in the minds of Christians does it process that the people that work in the restaurants they go to after Sunday church services, are somehow exempted from those Sabbath prohibitions and penalties? So... Where are these good Christians biblically - with them being the willing enablers of sin by patronizing these fine establishments? According to the Bible - "The Sabbath" is serious business. First established and made holy by God himself (Genesis 2:2-3 KJV), as part of the (first) Genesis creation narrative. And we read that "keeping the Sabbath" is the fourth commandment out of ten dictated, allegedly given to Moses on Mount Sinai (Deuteronomy 5:6-21 KJV).

"The Sabbath," at least biblically, is something important - something never, not to be messed with (Exodus 31:15 KJV). Remember - Jehovah, God commanded that a guy should be put to death, just for picking up sticks on this day (Numbers 15:32-36 KJV).

And "Grace" doesn't apply here...

On a more practical level - I don't see why good wait staff would want to work in any restaurant that has a large patronage of Black Christians that loudly arrive after Sunday services - they don't tipanyway... So why mess with that? No biblical exceptions for the football players in Sunday NFL games, or the folks that work at the power company (your lights on?); no dude - not even the folks at the gas station; how about the Fire Department: Answering machine kicks in: "Keep theSabbath holy... If your house is on fire, please call us back on Monday morning..." Would "The Sabbath" (Exodus 20:8-11 KJV) work FOR YOU, in this instance?

Stupid.

Then, to add to the confusion, as far as non-Christians outside of this, and them looking at the strong variances and denominational colors within the Christian landscape; the Christians themselves don't seem to be in any agreement as to whether the actual "Sabbath" should be Sunday or Saturday. Present-day examples of "Saturday Sabbath-Keepers" specifically include: The Seventh-Day Adventists, The Seventh-Day Baptists, The Seventh-Day Evangelist Church, The Christ's Assembly, The International Church of God, and a whole bunch more, along with all churches worldwide claiming biblical support for Sunday OR Saturday holy days. Churches make this claim with the warning that doing sabbatistic devotionals on the wrong day is a hot ticket to hell.

Is it?

Well - the Catholic Church, meeting at the "Council Of Laodicea" (363-364 AD), transferred "Sabbath" devotionals from Saturday to Sunday, with no divine consultation whatsoever. None. They didn't ask God shit. Maybe, permission to make that switch wasn't needed (the switch order came from Mr. Constantine). The Catholic priesthood has always claimed they should have "authority" over motherfuckers: Maybe, they and the ruling powers should have "authority" over "God's Word," as well? Who knows?

So, every denomination, it looks like, seems to "stake-out" their own day, according to their own taste preference of Sunday or Saturday. Is that what's happening? I was thinking about throwing a wrench into all this by starting my own church and claiming that the real "Sabbath" is actually on Tuesday, and that God himself revealed this to me: "Right after eating a great bowl of Cocoa Puffs. A bright light appeared. And the Holy Spirit cameupon me (get out the gutter please)." Right? I could preach this - and I know I would be able to get away with it.

What the hell?

Preachers do this stuff all the time.

Now...

I had mostly kept my Atheism to myself (with the exception of immediate family) for years. I did not open my mouth to the public about my position until immediately after 9/11/2001. That was when another "Party Of God" decided to make a strong political and religious statement by flying planes into buildings. A good friend (Seima Aoyama) was on American Airlines Flight 11. I had never read a book written by any Atheist up till that time. I had my own good reasons for not believing, so I had no real need (so I thought) to seek other viewpoints. When I did start reading Atheist literature, one of the things that struck me - and still does, is the tremendous knowledge of the Bible that many Atheists possess.

Most Atheists that I have read and listened to seem to have a better grasp of the Bible and of the many diverse Christian doctrines, along with general Christian philosophy, doctrinal history, and theology than professional religionists or clergy. My personal observations reveal that - the greater the amount of detailed knowledge one has about the Bible, the greater the likelihood that one may become Atheist, or may already be so. That is why I strongly believe - if I do believe anything, that 97% of full-time clergy (especially those with advanced degrees), professional apologists, and well-educated politicians are privately Atheist, but will never publicly admit the fact because of social, political, strategic, and economic reasons. A bunch of pragmatic wimps and liars.

It is a solid fact that many people become Atheists as a result of going to college classes in theology or biblical studies - there are a LOT of those. People that have been formally educated in some of the world's best divinity schools (and I mean like - Oxford, Princeton, Harvard, etc...), are presently some of the biggest and most passionate advocates for Atheism (like author Dr. Hector Avalos - Professor of Religious Studies at Iowa State University. To check him, click on the link below). Why do these sorts of people become hard non-believers? I think it is because Atheists truly care about whether their "operating system" is true or not.

And the reason that YOU need to figure out whether your "operating system" is true or not is because as far as we know - we only have one lifetime. No one has proven otherwise. And there is a higher probability of that lifetime being a quality lifetime if we all at minimum have the clearest and most accurate understanding of reality to reference from. The Bible must be opened up to this type of evaluative scrutiny in fact - not in faith, because the Bible makes strong affirmative statements regarding reality. Folks - it [Christianity] IS an "operating system." OK?

Therefore - any scripture, religion or life philosophy should and must be open to the closest examination - the hardest scrutiny - the most critical dismantlement of every single point presented - evaluated in fact - not in faith. That religion or life philosophy should be able to stand up to - and to then clearly remain completely operable under that kind of evaluative pressure - before it should be adopted as a reference guide for your life.

This is INCLUDING the Bible.

Does that make sense?

This research and scrutinization should always be done by and for YOU. That - "this is how I grew up" - or - "that's what my momma believed" - or - "cuz that's the tradition in my family" type bullshit, ain't nowhere near good enough reasons to be "believing" anything. This is nothing but super-niggerized intellectual laziness - and motherfuckers allowing themselves to be trapped in the worlds of "the comfortable" and "the familiar." "Believing" shit. You guys are fucking grown-assed men. OK? Grown motherfuckers should not be "believing" anything. Can we stick the "Tooth Fairy" and "Santa Claus" in there too? Fuck that. How about some facts man? Operative wisdom lies in understanding that truth, proof, and reason trumps tradition, hope, and faith every time.

Faith Equals Death.

Faith Equals Gullibility.

Faith Equals the excuse making move - when you insist on believing things that have no logical basis or evidence to back up the move.

Facts Over Faith man. FACTS OVER FAITH.

OK?

Understand - this Bible makes bold claims and assertions about the nature of reality, the course of earth history, and the course of cosmic development. "The Book Of Revelation" for example, takes a predictive position on the actual "end of the world." But it reads like the reflection of a crazy bitch on abad acid trip - for example. This Bible trespasses, emptily, upon all areas that have been duly explained over time through the scientific method, and clarified through historical, cultural, and archaeological research... Nothing verifiable man. How the universe came about, how life developed, the causes of disease, and so forth.

History - what verifiable realities actually happened? The Bible in fact (not faith) comes up as woefully short, fully eclipsed by scholarship, experiment, research, and verifiable experience - when it comes to clear explaining of anything historically, culturally, morally, or scientifically. Historically - it does not do any better than begat, begat, begat...

And no dates.

This is why the Bible has to constantly be "defended," in order to remain usable - because most assertions and claims put forth in that ancient book cannot be demonstrated. Atheists won't do it - they have rightly gone beyond "defending" anything. Fuck that. Evidence and reason are the only things that count with anything.

So people...

Everything, including "God's Word" is open to QUESTION.

Is a, or any claim observable, transferable, and testable - or is it not?

And if it is not - why not?

"Blasphemy?"

FUCK you and your blasphemy - BITCH.

So fellas, OK - can any"defended" biblical explanation, for any stated phenomena, claim, revelation, or occurrence, be rendered here-on-the-ground touchable, logical and coherent, without us at any point resorting to metaphysics, "spirituality" shit, or transcendence - to complete that explanation? I don't know of any. But, we do have many good folks in our midst who claim as their anointing to "defend the word."

Now dudes - if any biblical assertion regarding this reality is truly true, that truth would only need to be stated, demonstrated, and explained - NOT "defended." Any "Truth," if it is true, does not require "faith," "belief," or "defense." Truth - in itself, is its own defense. Only accused people, liars, bullshit, nonsense, and truth claims, asserted without evidence or corroboration have a need to be "defended."

That's what lawyers are for.

On that note - it is irritating as hell to talk to most Christians about certain passages in their scripture, because they don't know what the hell you are talking about. "That's not in my Bible!!!" - at that point, you have to grab THEIR Bible away from them, turn to the appropriate passage, cite it, watch the cognitive dissonance arise, kick-in, and then allow yourself to be entertained with the apologetic dance they always do when they encounter something in the Bible that THEY recognize is literally heinous, literally untrue, literally contradictory, or literally stupid. I recognized those things in the Bible when I was a mere teenager, so I know that astute religionists and the clergy see those things also. And if any one of them says anything about those things to the contrary of what I am saying RIGHT HERE - know that you are looking at a lying motherfucker. The average, run-of-the-mill believer needs to read and see those things as well - so that person may formulate a pure, un-assisted, but informed judgment.

For instance, a critical read reveals that the Bible is horribly edited - for example; there are TWO creation stories, with TWO different versions (Oops!) of the order in which God created things (No.1 - Genesis 1:1 through 2:3 and - No.2 - Genesis 2:4-24).

"Ohshit - which one? -

Make up your mind Yahweh!!!"

Now... Just so you CAN SEE what I am talking about - here it is:

CREATION ACCOUNT NUMBER ONE:Genesis 1:25-27 KJV (Humans were created after the animals) -

"(25) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after theirs, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.(26) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.(27) So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

Genesis 1:27 KJV (Man and woman were created at the same time) -"(27) So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

CREATION ACCOUNT NUMBER TWO:

Genesis 2:18-19 KJV (Humans were created before the animals) -

"(18) And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make a help meet for him.(19) And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

Genesis 2:18-22 KJV (A man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib) -

"(18) And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make a help meet for him.(19) And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.(20) And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.(21) And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;(22) And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man."There you go...

I am citing these famous passages so you guys can clearly see that I am not bullshitting about this bullshit. A major editorial fuck-up. Latter-day apologists try to interpretively clean up this mess with an utterance that allegedly came from Jesus:

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10:6 KJV)."
They use this "marker" to interpretively point your allegiance to the first creation account (Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 KJV) - this is nothing but a likely outlier verse being authoritatively utilized as a strategic scriptural "workaround." Looking close - this "statement" gives you no details or toeholds or direction to work with. Nothing. But hey, I will say this: "The next time you good religious hustlers come out with a new scripture, or 'revelation,' or any such nonsense that you guys will claim was given to you (only) from "on high" - please invest in some good editors and proofreaders so that you may avoid these kinds of fuck-ups. You would not want any compositional, grammatical, or punctuation errors (you know?), unnecessarily raising doubts, close examinations, second-guessing, fact-checking, and inconvenient questions...

You know?

And then there is the problem of the tremendous inconsistencies of the "Four Gospels" in the New Testament - Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Between the four, the Gospels have got to be some of the worst reporting on a single story, about a single guy (Jesus) in the history of reporting anything. If you had employees that botched a very important business report, and had fucked it up to the same exalted level of ineptitude that is reflected in the Gospels, you would not have just fired the bastards - you would have those employees blacklisted from ever being employed in the same industry that you may be a part of, anywhere in the motherfucking world, as a matter of protection... The Gospels are put together that badly.

And I am supposed to base my life on a fuck-up? Ahh... No.

Compositional errors abound here, and many Gospel accounts are not in any useful way complementary between the four on important details. For example: My own studies (as a teenager) counted at least 106 separate and overlapping points that don't totally square, or don't square at all, points that are here, but are not there, and accounts that may be told of the same occurrence - but the telling(s) themselves are in themselves totally different stories, or the occurrence is missing entirely, and something else replaces it, within the same time frame, in another Gospel - or two - or three.

Did you get that?

Good - most don't.

Matthew says there was an earthquake when Mary Magdalene and the other Mary(?) came to visit Jesus' tomb (Matthew 28:1-10 KJV). How did Mark, Luke, and John miss that? I mean seriously - how in the fuck do you miss an earthquake? Three guys out of four? The GOSPELS? Look for yourself, the other three Gospels make no mention of this event at all. As a fact of scripture - each one of the four Gospels has a totally different resurrection story regarding the firstvisitors to Jesus' tomb. We have FOUR TOTALLY DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS - regarding the same, singular, unique occurance. NO, NO, and NO... This is unacceptable. It is not like these particular books are separated or dispersed into different locations within the New Testament, or that they have no relation to each other. Hell NO buddy - these are the first four books of the New Testament: Matthew - Mark - Luke - John - sitting there, in that order, together, like a set.

These - "Gospels," supposedly, being the most important - the central part of the Bible for all Christians, should be the tightest, most profound, and most unimpeachable part of scripture. But - they are literally not!

Read your Bibles!

There are also problems recounting Jesus' genealogy; specifically laid-out by Luke and Matthew. But before we go into this - I want to point out that the fact that there is any "genealogy" regarding Jesus in the Bible, is just one example of the kind of confused reasoning that abounds throughout the Bible. How could Jesus - being "The Son Of God," even have a "lineage?" OK? Having no 'earthly' father, or genetically related 'mother' on the one end - and him not 'begetting' any children of his own on the other end - what possible 'lineage' could Jesus have or produce?

This is not an unreasonable question.

According to some Bible scholars, Luke's account (3:23-28 KJV), follows the lineage of Mary. Really? Wasn't that booty supernaturally hijacked by the Holy Spirit for a minute? And the Bible makes no note of any possible genetic connection to Mary. OK? THINK - This "Blessed, Immaculately Conceived Virgin" - Mary - basically functioned as a "total surrogate." No egg was donated, no sperm was introduced. That was a "spirit-injected" - THEN transitioning into "flesh" type operation. OK? Matthew (1:1-17 KJV), follows the lineage of Joseph. How is this? Sounds like Joseph needs to make that appointment with Maury - right? "In the case of Jesus Christ - Joseph - You Are Not The Father!" OK? Right? So, I must ask: "For what purpose is an earth-sourced 'lineage' in there?" We have always been taught that Jesus is "The Son Of God."

Is that correct?

So - what does "Son Of God" mean?

Anyway - both Gospels sweetly begin, showing that Jesus was sired, not by Joseph, but by God (through the "Holy Spirit?!") - then, after a hot and heavy pregnancy - we have Jesus himself, "The Savior," wet - popping up and out of Mary's sweeet, immaculate, virgin (whoa)!

"Here's a towel baby!!!"

Now... The lists are consistent between Abraham and David - but after that, everything goes waaay off-track. Biblical scholars (for centuries) have tried to explain why the lists are so different, putting forth various theories (and to this day have not come to any consensus). Past Abe and Dave, ain't nothing there matching-up nowhere. The Bible itself makes no distinctions, or gives up any kind of explanations for these discrepancies. The output from Bible scholars for hundreds of years regarding this issue amount to guessing. But the latest formal scholarship now regards these genealogies as pure inventions. So - either way, we laymen don't know what we are looking at.

Now...

The core teaching, the rationale of the "Good News," the witness of the itinerant ministry of Jesus, the ultimate sacrifice of his flesh for the sake of mankind - and, the great promise of his future return should have been solidly and accurately recounted here. FINE... But, instead of the Gospels being the most finely-tuned and organized example of revelatory literature on the planet (after all, it was "divinely inspired" and motivated - right?) - we have a holy mishmash so haphazardly compiled and nonsensically messaged that it should raise serious doubts in the mind of any THINKING person about its historic accuracy, the veracity of any claims made, and - most importantly, the existence of any divine influences in its creation.

Before I read the Gospels, I had already had doubts about Jesus' divinity, "The Son Of God," all that stuff. You know... At that point I did not have any doubts about Jesus' possible existence. But after I thoroughly read, exhaustively analyzed, and reflected (for a long time) upon the Gospels, I came to this logical place:

And until I get that EVIDENCE, I will remain convinced in certainty that the biblically presented Jesus never existed. OK?

Now, we won't go into any discussion tonight, regarding some of the stupid nonsense that allegedly came out of Jesus' mouth during his "ministry." Those will be subject matter(s) for future discussions. But for the moment - well, let's put it this way: Some of the stuff he said - I would have crucified his ass too.

Understand this believers -just think... There is a full, international Gospel sub-industry that spends its working time trying to reconcile these four distinct accounts of Jesus' birth, ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection into forms that are "digestible" and reasonably coherent to the believing public, and also, easily usable by clergy. There is a whole lot of creative energy being expended on this part of the Bible. There are organizations, professional apologists, hundreds of books, articles, and thousands of internet pages addressing this single problem, one term used to describe this challenge is the "Synoptic Problem." Check Google and Amazon for materials and websites that offer comprehensive and detailed scholarship regarding this.

Biblical scholars have been working their holy asses off to resolve this un-resolvable since the middle of the 18th Century. What is this - the 21st? And they still haven't been able to put this stuff in sync?

Ask yourself, good Christian: "If 'The Gospel' was 'divinely inspired by a perfect God' - then why would 'The Word Of God' need to be further researched - and then 'fixed' - after the 'inspiration?"

The Gospels are an editorial mess - this is not good work.

As an aside - my grandmother belonged to what is called a "Full Gospel Church." Now - there are lots of them in Black neighborhoods. As a kid, I actually thought (for real) that "Full Gospel" was probably something you graduated to. I never expressed anything regarding that - but I harbored the notion that there must be "Half Gospel," and maybe "Quarter Gospel" churches in existence somewhere. Right? Otherwise, why would it be necessary to distinguish a church as "Full Gospel" when the prime concentration of any church is supposed to be "The Gospels" anyway? OK?

PART TWO:

"Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if someone bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer [a beating] for doing good and you [still] endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered [on the Cross] for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps."

1Peter 2:18-21 NIV

Now - let's talk slavery.

Black Christians hate for the slavery parts of the Bible to be brought up because that embarrassing slavery issue hits so very close to home and ancestry, and because any divinely permitted slavery calls into obvious question the actual quality of biblically sourced "morality," seeing as how slavery in itself is morally indefensible in any context, in any way.

"That's right Black Christians, if SLAVERY is permissible, then rape, murder, battery, kidnapping, false imprisonment, forced labor, and robbery is also permissible, since those seven criminal components are the principal aggregates of slavery. So, with that - all of those "moral barometer" type niggers out there, need to ask: "Where was God's 'moral barometer' at?" before any of them, standing tall in their righteous Black arrogance, ask anyfuckingbody else, "where is theirs?" ifthe same God that all these blind, Black, Christianized motherfuckers believe in, can sanctify, regulate, and allow, thiskindof immoral, inexcusable, bullshit."

Was that offensive? Oh, Jeez - I'm sorry.

The slavery directives from the mouth of God kinda destroys the "all men are equal in the eyes of the Lord" argument. And likewise, the tired-assed Black preacher bromide: "We are all God's children..." Are we? All of us? So Black folks - how does God permit some of his "children" to enslave some of his other "children" if we are all "equal in the eyes of the Lord?" Especially if many or all of those enslaved "children" have most certainly done nothing obvious within this lifetime to deserve to be so onerously circumscribed - within this lifetime. Abortion opponents consistently tell us that every fucking soul is created at the moment of conception. Well - are they? And if they are - by what process are some "equally-seen" souls designated for enslavement, or not?

Understand, people...

The Bible is literally a sickening slave-o-holic orgy of God-given morality in action. Some parts, like in Old Testament Leviticus, spell out directly from the Lord's mouth, rules, regulations, and standards: Like - "You can enslave those motherfuckers - just don't enslave these motherfuckers" (Leviticus 25:45-46 KJV). And: "You can beat the shit out your slave - just don't beat ALL of the shit out of him - OK?" (Exodus 21:20-21 KJV). Other parts on slavery found in the New Testament read like a manual of slave etiquette - sweet, pretty stuff like: "Slaves, no matter how big an asshole your slave master might be - do not hate him, but continue to serve him well, only because he belongs to the congregation of believers. Oh - and don't forget to teach other slaves this shit" (1Timothy 6:2 KJV). Read it - read that Bible, and understand Black people - that Holy Bible is always on the side of the slaveholder - not you.

The Bible also says: "Slaves - no matter how far your slave-master may have his foot up your ass, or how badly he may abuse you - it is your duty as a good and faithful slave to maintain your devotion to your master, as well as your respectfulness towards him" (1Peter 2:18 KJV). And in order to make sure that a slave stayed in working order - Jesus HEALS A SICK SLAVE, and afterwards, he graciously takes the time to praise the slave-master holding this man, for his strong faith (Luke 7:2-10 KJV).

I guess Jesus doesn't do FREEDOM.

And no Christian could rightly bring to me the convoluted and meaningless equality statement expounded in Ephesians 6:5-9 KJV, nor the excretable lie of Galatians 2:6 KJV. These verses (and others) are used a lot by spiritual hustlers to "wallpaper" over other biblical verses regarding slavery that are clearly not acceptable to the generally enlightened moral sensibilities of 21st Century Americans. Folks, open your Bibles (please) and read these beautifully rendered verses directly for yourselves. Then think carefully about my reaction to them: "No matter how adeptly clergymen and spiritual hustlers may work their smooth interpretive magic on these verses, there is not, nor ever will there be equality between master and slave."

So...

That is why I like to bring slavery up when we Black folks are talking Bible stuff among ourselves, because man, when I do bring it up, one or more Christian knuckleheads will lose their minds, and then start kicking-up dust and sputtering passionately about "mis-interpreting" and "twisting the word," and I crack-up, because all that defensive shit is pure entertainment to me. "But Christians - it is too damned bad somebody a long time ago did not have the foresight to edit that slave stuff out of there - but they didn't. And it is too late to take those slave verses out of there - we all know they are difficult to explain away. And too many folks in the world have seen those words, and now they have to stay in there, for everybody else, and more to see... Because if you took them out now - somebody will look like they are full of SHIT OK?"

Now...

Black Atheists get particularly peeved when a faith-addled Black person will say this shit: "The slavery in the Bible was different than the slavery we had here!" Niggers! Even if slavery were "different" - given our history, why would anysane African-American type person be cool with slavery on any level, in whatever flavor, whether the permission to do slavery came from heaven or earth? Talk about "operational stupidity?" Every society mentioned in the Bible, from Babylon to Egypt, was a fucking slave regime. If anything - slavery was probably even more brutal during Biblical times, than the nasty American version.

Why? How? Because slavery in those times was actually culturally ingrained, punitive, compensative, military, and political, whereas the (400 year) American version was purely from a business intent, the most important part of an international agricultural-industrial complex. A great example of "Unregulated Capitalism" gone amok. So - there was a necessary "corporate" interest in keeping slaves in the best working condition as possible, and as under control, on every level as possible. The only advantage that ancient slaves seemed to have over American slaves was some autonomy of thought and some basic freedom of expression. But it was still slavery, and as such, totally indefensible.

Folks, remember that the centerpiece of the narrative in The Epistle To Philemon (this is in the New Testament) was regarding a runaway slave by the name of Onesimus. "Slavery was different?" OK... Does "different" mean "better?" OK... Then why is the Bible talking about a runaway slave, if slavery was so "different" - and maybe "better," in biblical times? What the fuck was Onesimus running from? Decor in the slave quarters wasn't fashionably up to par? Cheap champagne? Not enough days off? What? Isn't the brutal American history of slavery heavily shot through with accounts of runaways? Doesn't the Bible permit the beating of slaves (Exodus 21:20-21 KJV)? Is it possible in biblical times they also had an "Underground Railroad" too, of sorts, that we don't know about? If there was - was it set up for the same reasons? Who knows? Maybe, if there were runaways in biblical times - then maybe, it was about the same kind of slave bullshit we had here in America... Christian slaves running away from Christian slaveholders, for the same reasons.

And folks - may I remind you... Slavery is SLAVERY motherfuckers!!!

Is that really so hard for Black people to understand? There is NO possible justification for biblically approved slavery folks - NONE. Why is that no-brainer concept so hard for niggers to wrap their fucking minds around? No Slavery Man!!! - NO - NONE... If someone "owns" you - any "morals" that your "masters," or that God himself may demand that you exercise, simply would not, should not, and cannot apply to you. For example, if you are a slave, it would be perfectly moral for you to kill your master and his family. That's right - KILL that motherfucker. Keep stabbing that sonofabitch until the lights go out - AMEN... All together now: "Keep Stabbing..." Didn't that feel good? That would not be murder - that would be a justified act of liberation. A switchblade to heaven - if you will. It would be perfectly moral for you to run away - righteously stealing yourself back from somebody that stole you.

Shouldn't you own yourself? I think so.

It would be perfectly moral, for you to look to the sky - and tell God: "Fuck You!" For divinely abetting this bullshit... Why? According to the Bible - God and Jesus are unreservedly OK with slavery. Christians remind us everyday that: "God's In Control." OK? Folks - if God is IN CONTROL - that would mean THIS shit too - no exceptions. Look man - there's several things going on here. Niggers will say: "Ah... God didn't approve of slavery - he was just trying to make slavery more humane - you have to understand the kind of barbarism they had back then as well." Now - let's remember guys: "God's In Control." OK? "God Is All-Powerful." OK? So how would the "times" or any culture of any time, discussed at any time, make any difference to him? HOW?

Have you ever noticed in the Bible, that whenever "The Lord" really wants things to happen or change - he proactively makes that shit go down RIGHT AWAY?

Five examples:

1. Creates a whole universe in six days (Genesis 1:1-2:3 KJV).

2. When Adam and Eve fucked up, heaven quickly issued the world's first eviction notice: "Get the fuck OUT - NOW!" Motherfuckers didn't even have time to pack (Genesis 3:22-24 KJV).

3. When God's chosen people ("chosen folks?!") were getting the hell out of Dodge [Egypt] - no fucking time wasted - dude parted the Red Sea in six seconds flat (Exodus 13:17 - 14:29 KJV).

4. The Tower Of Babel? NOT happening people - squashed that shit in three seconds (Genesis 11:1-9 KJV).

5. Releasing Christian niggers out of Christian slavery? "Hold On! Let's - ahh, lemme think about this - in the meantime, I can put you niggers on my 400 year waiting list. OK (No Scripture For This Shit - KJV)?"

Hmm... Let's see. First niggers landed in the Americas in 1562 on the good ship "Jesus" - then later, Abraham Lincoln did us with a fucking "Emancipation Proclamation" in 1863. That's 301 years. Then, let us add in another 130 years of legal post-slavery bullshit. OK? Now from that - we can clearly see that this merciful God keeps the well-being of Black people securely in mind as an urgent priority. You can see that - Right? Mere seconds or days in response or proaction to everything else. But several hundred years before the most pious, faithful Christians on earth (us niggers) could even receive anything resembling partial relief for our suffering. And niggers are still waiting for the rest of the package. From an "all-powerful" god. Even if God were conclusively proven to exist - that would be all the more reason for me to give him a solid -FUCK YOU. Then - I could finish my ice cream...

You see?

Look man. This is slavery, somebody else OWNING you, a fuckjob just short of murder, solidly approved, from Genesis (starting with Genesis 9:25-27 KJV), in the Old Testament, till the closing book of the New Testament (ending with Revelation 18:13 KJV), this...

Clearly articulated - with no repeal:
Quote -"Exhort servants [slaves] to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things(?); not answering again [talking back]; Not purloining [stealing] but shewing[showing] all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things" (Titus 2:9-10KJV).

That is the New Testament - there are 66 books in the King James Bible - Titus is book number 56 folks (count um)! Jesus himself used slaves and slavery in several parables to illustrate certain points - but sadly, he never - nowhere repudiated the practice itself. And with that - niggers will still say: "Ahh... Slavery was different then..." I am overwhelmingly glad that Black people can't justifiably apply that kind of then/now excuse-making or logic easily to other things: "Murder IS bad - but you see, murder then was different than the way they kill motherfuckers today." - OR - "That's not right - beatings then were different than the way they pound motherfuckers today." - OR - "Naw MAN - you know, rape in those days was different than the way they take pussy today."

You see how stupid that relativistic shit sounds?

It blows me how unlearned Christians always attempt to amateurishly sanitize huge piles of theistic bullshit - and then expect everyone else to respect their pious-assed, unlettered nonsense, just because it is arrogantly and authoritatively asserted as religious and biblical.

They may be able to do that with others - but not me.

And Christians...

When you critically read your Bible, please don't allow part-time apologist Christians to persuade you to believe those "nice" words "servant," or "bondman" (in some translations), mean something other than "slave." Some translations render that word [slave] in a "softer" way so that you can ignorantly "skip-over" the ugly brutality of what that nasty word actually communicates. "Servant" or "bondman" means SLAVE within any context in any Bible - along with all the bullshit that comes with it. I own and reference from twelve different Bible versions - I KNOW what I am talking about. Now, some amateur apologists will say that this "Holy Bible" is really talking about an "employment situation" (seriously?!), or that most instances of slavery as being some kind of contractual agreement:

"Both thy bondmen [slaves], and thy bondmaids [slaves], which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen [non-Israelites] that are round about you; of them shall ye buybondmen and bondmaids" (Leviticus 25:44 KJV).

Does that sound like a "contractual agreement" to you?

Doesn't "buy" mean "purchase?" Like property?

How about this killer:

"Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritancefor your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren [tribe] the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor" (Leviticus 25:45-46 KJV).

Seriously? So - if you "hire" a slave you get to keep his kids too? Forever? This is "employment?" How do niggers blowpast this shit?

What would an "application for slavery" look like?

Another thing that one should be on the lookout for, as you are reading your Bible without assistance; is the tired, Old Testament versus New Testament smokescreen when the issue of slavery is being discussed. Again - there is no repeal of the practice in either testament, and there are more positive references to slavery in the New Testament as opposed to the Old Testament (read your entire Bible and see).

And did not Jesus state:

"Think not that I am come to destroy [revoke] the Law or the Prophets [of the Old Testament]. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Matthew 5:17 KJV).

Meaning - "Don't think I came to change things - I am here to make sure all of this Old Testament shit will keep going down, and that includes SLAVERY people!" That's Jesus, for you... So, if you make light of this - don't fall for being accused of "mis-interpreting," or "twisting the word," of "not having enough faith," or for "taking things out of context," or for "not being covered in the BLOOD," or, for you not understanding some "deeper meaning." This is, all, off-tracking - change the direction of the conversation type bullshit. If you allow yourself to be influenced by this nonsense - please. The Bible has no more "deeper meaning" than a roll of toilet paper.

Stop listening to the pious knuckleheads, and get yourself a beer.

PART THREE:
"For I am going to raise up a shepherd over the land who will not care for the lost, or seek the young, or heal the injured, or feed the healthy, but will eat the meat of the choice sheep, tearing off their hooves."

Zechariah 11:16 NIV

Now - for "The Word Of God..."

Before we go further into "The Word Of God" - the next thing I want you to peep from amateur apologists is what I call "The Oldest Diversion:" This shit is usually pulled out by astute but semi-educated believers that know enough about the Bible to recognize that there are a lot of things within that book that are straight-up indefensible. So, if you are doing a reasonably good job of pointing out the bullshit, they will attempt to change the focus by saying: "In order to get the true meaning of God's word - you've got to get theoooldest manuscripts from the Dead Sea, and read them in the original languages." Really? OK. Let's, let's process this... "So, OK - In order for me to get the 'true meaning' of 'God's Word' - because hey, according to you, even though we DO have a Bible - it apparently ain't in the Bible - so we gotta do this - Right??? -

OK - So... I have to:

1. Learn to read dead languages.

2. Update my passport.

3. Get a visa.

4. Purchase a travel package.

5. Purchase a bulletproof vest (That is the Middle East, you know).

6. Learn to swim (I'm not good at it).

And, once I do ALL this...Ding!!! - I GOT IT!" Is that how it works?

This trick is usually effective against potential unbelievers that are not well-versed in the literal Bible or don't know much about biblical history, composition, and construction. But one thing that should be obvious about these "Deadseamen," if you ask, you will find that none of THEM have done any of these things. Every one of those good "Dead Sea" apologists have in their possession, and are referencing from the same Bible that THEY say that the "true meaning" contained therein is somehow compromised - and that YOU will never understand it properly because YOU are not reading it in the "original languages." If that is the case - why do THEY even own one single Bible in the English language, if it is not literally leading them to the truth?Just a question.

Now, check this shit - these are the same motherfuckers that can barely pronounce a word in English that has five or more letters in it properly. So now - they are trying to tell YOU to read something, not only in another language, but in a dead language at that. (Take a good hit off your blunt at this point...) Really? (Now exhale...) When they expend this bullshit; notice when they say the word "oldest" - they always hang on that long "O" sound - "The OOOldest." Now, it is quite true that niggers are enamoured with ancient sounding shit. You know? Right? Especially those "Hotep" type motherfuckers. Them kinda dudes, you know? Every third word out their mouths is; "ancient this," "ancient that."

And that "O" sounds "mystic," and "spiritual," and "back-in-the-day-ish." You know? So - they hang onto that long "O" sound like somebody is trying to stick a dick in their ass.

Please.

So people - what do we do with the Bibles that we have in hand - if this "oldest" shit is correct? If the Bibles that we have are so faulty - that we have to take a geographical and literary trip back in time to get the "true meaning," I would like to ask the "Dead Sea" folks: "What is the pastor at the church that you attend referencing from, and if he does have the same awareness of the 'true meaning' theory, that you do - what the fuck is he doing?"

Don't get upset motherfucker - I'm just asking a question.

Never mind - I have the answer: "It is because of the fact that he has been 'called to preach' - that has infused him with the God-given ability to avoid the spiritual pitfalls, and to righteously fill-in the gaps!!!" Really? I am not trying to be funny here - a Christian ACTUALLY told me this... Now people - let us take a minute...

Did you get that beer yet? OK.

NOTE THIS: Some "Deadseamen" are also the exact types of people that tend to overtly distance themselves from the Bible and formally organized Christianity for various reasons (Maybe because the Bible and Christianity are maybe too embarrassing to be actively associated with? Who knows?). When you engage with these folks, you'll find that they always have this creatively pieced-together personal philosophy-religion to go with the distance. These folks are essentially and actually a denomination unto themselves. They are... They just need three more people to subscribe to their particular spiritual mixtape - and Voila!!!

Another church has been established.

They will state that they are "spiritual, not religious." Which to me, is the same as somebody saying: "I'm a person, not a human being." That sounds like the type of vaporous non-statement that would release from the mouth of a great politician. Where - on the surface, the statement "sounds" good - profound even, but on close examination, both ends of this beautiful statement actually cancel each other out... Nothing but a sophisticated wave of organized sounds so astoundingly meaningless - that anyone allowing such an expulsion to issue from their lips, once done, cannot seriously be taken seriously.

"Spiritual, but not religious," is one of those fucking "enlightenment is like the sound of one hand clapping" type statements (that "one hand clapping" shit is an effective sense-bending "spiritual" hustle worked by Asian "guru" types on rich white people). So - you know, the shit is - pure nonsense served with scrambled eggs and toast, but that particular zero is usually rendered so beautifully and expended so sincerely, that in response, it deserves the best you can give in mocking and ridicule.

But - I do get it: I mean - if you are going to talk nonsense, you should do the shit convincingly, eloquently, and with class.

Now...

Preachers do what I call "spotlighting" - highlighting Bible passages that will promote what the pastor wants you to walk away with, and minimizing or skipping-over those passages that are problematic, or are too difficult to "interpret" convincingly, or may cause one to think (can't have that). In my experience over the many years of listening to sermons, I have found consistently that a maximum of only twelve percent of a sermon is expounded directly from the Bible.

That's it.

Verse-hopping does not count ("Turn to the book of... And read verse... And now turn..."), verse-hopping is a diversionary and time-consuming exercise in page-turning that only makes the pastor look like he's "doing something." Folks, understand that "verse-hopping" is one of several preaching techniques that are utilized, to smoothly convey the pastor to the points within the service in which he asks for the money - which is of course, the bottom line of any sermon.

The rest (the other 88 percent) of the sermon actually comes from seven main extra-biblical sources. And the seven are:

The Christianity that today's Christians practice, is not a reflection of the literal word of the Bible. It is a scripture-abbreviated, strategically-directed and politically-accreted dis-construction. This is a mix of the doctrinal peculiarities of the denomination you may belong to, the biblical passages your church decides to highlight, the biblical passages your church decides to ignore or mis-state, its biblical re-interpretational latitude, the political agendas that church wants to support and promote, and the pastor's personal agenda.

In other words - MARKETING dude... A Christian from the first century would not in any way - recognize today's "Christian" practices at all, he would actually be more scripturally literal and devotionally direct.

If he is able to read.

What??? LOOK...

Dude - all of the Bible must be literally considered - every word must be weighed evenly across the board. Why? In its literalness the Bible is rightly considered to literally be "The Word Of God" as it is - before interpretational processing. No all-wise being would intentionally make such an important message to those that he supposedly "loves" - so incredibly difficult to get at or open - no part of that message would be esoterically locked-up - or would explain anything "metaphorically" - or would have any need for third parties (like clergy) to explain anything to anybody for him - or for any statements FROM HIM to be intentionally open to potentially dishonest man-made interpretive practices. No - he wouldn't. Shit - you wouldn't. Therefore - there is not (or shouldn't be) one verse or passage in the Holy Bible that can be legitimately ignored, overlooked, modified, interpreted, re-interpreted, relativised, historically contexed, or subjected to hermeneutical or apologetical processing.

If this Bible - IS "The Word" of an unchanging, eternal, all-powerful, and all-wise "Creator Of The Universe" - how can we humans have even one human motherfucker on this planet, that can open his HUMAN MOUTH - and righteously state, OK? That he has, or knows, or follows the "correct interpretation" OF "The Word Of God?" Any HUMAN claim of "correct interpretation," OK - automatically de-legitimizes AS "The Word Of God" - whatever comes out of anybody's mouth, that may be presented as "The Word Of God." Do you get the logic? And if you get the logic - then you will understand why clergy type motherfuckers always want you to replace your intellect with their "faith." That's right - these motherfuckers want YOU to get ahold of your HEAD - and turn your discernment and judgmental capacities down to ZERO - and don't forget to leave a hatch open - because they have something "better" to stick in there. The sheer degree of pimpin' arrogance that it takes to even think about DOING this - should be completely unacceptable to any thinking Christian.

Do you understand me?

Dude think - THINK...

A clergyfied sonofabitch whose total wisdom and understanding is an exponential infinity of magnitudes LESS than the source that he or she is supposedly interpreting from. So - how is a motherfucker able to do this? I mean - take "The Word Of God" - reprocess this eternal, unlimited shit within their own limited, HUMAN heads, OK - and then, hand the reconstituted bullshit over to you to "Believe IN." Huh? "A message from God?" Re-done by this motherfucker? Really?

Do niggers ever ask good questions?

Look - the only legitimate reading of "The Word Of God" is direct and literal. The fraudulent disciplines of apologetics and hermeneutics is part of a worldwide suckers game to get you to follow the marketing - and to keep your eyes and understanding away from the literal text and literal message of the Bible. Professionally trained religionists learn these tricknologies in divinity schools and universities.

THINK - if "The Word Of God" was not itself literally problematic in terms of history, science, sense, morality, logic, and in its ultimate applicability to everyday life - there would be no need for "The Word" to be subjected to any kind of hermeneutical or apologetic "adjustments" - by anybody. There would only be "The Word," as it is - straight - no chaser.

No - and they really give motherfuckers college degrees for this shit - a "theology degree" or a "doctorate in ministry." Really? A fucking joke. Dude - the same universities that are handing out these "Doctorates In Theology" might as well be handing out doctorates in crystal ballery and palm reading as well. The fucked-up thing about this is that it is not just fly-by-night diploma mills that are doing this shit - but top universities like Princeton, Harvard, and Yale. Why? I don't know. All three of those bitches have "divinity schools." Why? I don't know. These are SERIOUS schools - shit is amazing to me. How do you "school" divinity? OK? And all three of those ivy league bitches have solid departments of biology, physics, and chemistry as well. Oh - serious subjects too!!! OKAAY...

But check this - the disciplines of biology, physics, and chemistry are all grounded in things that the dumbest motherfucker you can pluck out of the gutter can demonstrably show to exist. Sonofabitch couldn't make it to third grade - but even his dumb ass can show you; living things exist, gravity exists, and the chemical we call water exists. "Theology" is the only discipline offered at top universities that the very existence of the central object of study itself, can seriously be called into question - by anybody - before we can even go into WHAT details we are going to study about it. Folks - please think about how crazy that shit is.

Choose any random student out of the three disciplines of biology, physics, and chemistry, ask about their shit - and to a man, they can give a solid, consistent, and coherent explanation regarding the basic details of their course of study. Ask any theology student about their shit: "Existence of God? Oh - Uh, lemme call my mom..."

I find that to be a problem. Don't you?

That existence of the central object can be seriously questioned by the disciplines of biology, chemistry, and physics as well - but HEY, not vice-versa. That's a problem. Do you understand me? Don't you think that we need to find out whether the main OBJECT of study is even PRESENT - I mean, actually existing before we proceed to study it? Because - if we don't - then, what the fuck are we studying? Right?

Folks - it is this kind of unproved, unverified bullshit existing within this particular field of study that I can call all theological disciplines out as fraudulent nonsense. A kind of academic insanity by consensus - no different than us having a serious conversation with the floor.

And the graduates...

Those well-educated motherfuckers will give you anything BUT - "The Word Of God." It is all a hustle. A big fuck. This shit would be funny if those "hermeneutic honchos" did not affect our crippled community so negatively with their poisonous interpretations and preachings.

Those same motherfuckers will tell you that Atheism is "for whites" or "Europeans" - not for "us." And that our ancestors were "spiritual" - and that we are "a spiritual people." They will say that people like me "are not really Black" - because I preach critical thinking to niggers.

ALERT - I am a non-believing NIGGER. I do all the things that niggers are supposed to do. Believe me. I eat fried chicken, talk shit, flirt with dark-skinned women with big booties, play dominoes, drink cheap beer, wear sunglasses at night, et cetera. And No pork. And No Jesus. And still Black. So bitches - don't come to me with that "not Black" shit.

So -

If the Bible is "The Word Of God" - then read it as "The Word Of God." You don't need to listen to any spiritual interpositor or any ordained intermediary that will reconstruct or reconstitute "The Word Of God" for you. Being "called to preach" - is in reality, an official license to lie, rape, and pickpocket. Folks get smart - don't let those "called" motherfuckers slick-maneuver you into their interpretational and hermenuetical traps. Clergymen are so full of shit - that many of them can't fully digest their own nonsense. OK? To be a real clergyman - a dual word - a dual meaning - and a dual life is necessary to keep functioning profitably.

That's why every once in while - the same motherfuckers that rail in their pulpits loud every Sunday about "The Gay Agenda" - and the sinfulness of homosexuality. OK? Somebody will catch one of those motherfuckers - in the back of a gas station on some far-off highway - sucking a dick. Y'all know I can't make that up. It's in the newspaper ("Pastor Who?!?!"). There are so many down-low pastors out there sucking dicks on the down-low regular - that I suspect - that there may be theology schools out there that offer as an elective - classes on how to catch a nut - and "The Holy Ghost" - at the same time.

There has to be.

OK dudes - before I move on... Do you guys get the logic that if this book - "The Bible" is truly "The Word Of the eternal - unchanging God" - then, it deserves nothing less than a strict, literal reading - BECAUSE it is "The Word Of God." Do you understand? NO - none of that: "Well - it was different back in biblical times," OR - "That's the Old Testament," type bullshit. Or must do a "nuanced reading" type bullshit. If "The eternal - unchanging, Word Of God" says you were supposed to stone gays to death then - then you are supposed to stone gays to death now. If "The eternal - unchanging, Word Of God" says it was cool to have slaves then - then it is cool to have slaves now. Why in the fuck would an infinite - unchanging God change up the meaning of all his eternally laid-down shit - just because YOUR black ass is on the scene NOW?

Huh? That makes NO SENSE.

No "interpretations." OK?

Think brothers - THINK:

How does an all-powerful, infinite, eternal God - a motherfucker that is absolutely running the entire universe - change his all-wise mind - and his all-wise word, based upon our mere human timeframes and culture evolutions, and then referenced from only ONE planet out of his entire universal creation? There would be no reason for him to do so. He IS all-powerful GOD eternal. And if that's the case - there can never be any differentiated "Biblical Times," - or any changes to the way "The Word" is presented - based partly or entirely on time - EVER. Any "Biblical Times" would always be in the present moment, then - and now. So that trick line; "back in biblical times" really doesn't mean anything. You see? So, once you step away from literalness - which would include "now-ness" - what the fuck are you or anyone else talking about?

There is not one line in the entire Bible that establishes any then or now time differentiations man. Look - Jesus himself simultaneously bridges and eliminates all "times" demarcations with a statement in Matthew 5:18 - paraphrasing; "till heaven and earth pass" - which is a long fucking time, OK? "Not one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law [of the prophets], till all be fulfilled." So covenetially - no past, present, or future changes - until the "fulfillment" (whatever that is) comes. And it looks like that hasn't happened yet.

So - "Where is that preacher getting his 'nuances' from?"

We have thousands of clergy and professional religionists - that will tell you that: "You need to do a more sophisticated reading of scripture." OR: "That verse is more nuanced than the literal reading that you are adhering to." OR: "That's not the traditional way this church views that scripture." This is nonsense - anyone that tells you this is full of shit.

Really - It takes a dumb motherfucker to continuously accept this kind of hermeneutical bullshit without push-back or closer examinations.

OK - now look niggers. Think about this shit: If you are reading what a biblical passage SAYS - but the clergy interpretively flips it - and tells you; that passage doesn't SAY what it SAYS. "Then what does it SAY motherfucker?" And if that passage does SAY something else, like they say it does - wouldn't it have been more efficient for it to SAY what it is supposed to SAY literally, in the first place - instead of wasting time through getting on the "deeper meaning" theological merry-go-round? Why would you need to rely on another HUMAN BEING to assist you in understanding what you read? An "anointed" motherfucker that has no more or better comprehension skills than YOU DO. Remember how his ass mis-pronounced everything at your relative's funeral? Remember that? Sonofabitch can't handle what's in his face - but he can tell you what an infinite mind is thinking.

Get The Fuck Outta Here...

If that isn't some insulting remedial bullshit - I don't know what is.

Black people need to wake up and stop letting religious motherfuckers lay all of this stupid interpretational bullshit on them. Look - what those bastards are saying is this: "What you are looking at - is not what you see. What a verse says, is not what it means. And the literal definition of a word - is not the true meaning of that word."

You see?

OK - it's like when a loudmouth sonofabitch tells you to: "Kiss My Ass." Consequently, of course - you understandably get ticked off at the fuck that shot that bullet in your direction. Right? But then some third party - interpretive type motherfucker - interposes himself between you and him, and tells you that that expression does not actually convey any kind of vitriol or contempt. No... YOU - are "misinterpreting" the whole thing.

And the reason you are "misinterpreting" his statement is "because YOU are not "covered in the blood" - if you are not "covered in the blood" you'll take the whole statement "out of context." Don't you get it? "Kiss My Ass" is actually an expression of love. That's why the word "Kiss" is there. "Kiss My Ass!?" That's Love... You're not "covered" man - so you're missing a deeper meaning... A correct interpretation will tell you why the word "Ass" is there - it's there so you can go in deep - and FEEL the love. Amen!!! I say "Kiss My Ass" to my wife EVERY morning brother... You can't be so naive as to take those words as anything other than love.

Wasn't that "sophisticated?"

I would seriously say to all Christians - take the responsibility for your own literal understanding. The things that Atheists say about the Bible in particular and Christianity in general is not smoke, nor intentional ungodliness, nor disrespect, nor an excuse to fuck, nor anger at God. It is part of a sincere quest for truth. But in seeking truth, we must have the logical courage to point out what is not true, or moral, or civilized. Discernment starts with being clear-minded, critical, honest, and admitting in a straightforward manner what is literally there.

The Bible is internally inconsistent, externally incongruent, a-historical, non-scientific, unclear in a lot of areas, stupid in a WHOLE LOT of areas. And in the areas that are the most explicit and fully intended to be taken literally, these cannot be put into practice, because anyone that does, will end-up insane, or incarcerated, or dead. That is what I have found.

In order to see for yourself, all you have to do - is read it, entirely.

Now - it may sound strange to the average Christian - but the great, international Christian Marketing Machine is well-designed and hard set to discourage direct and critical reading of the Bible by laymen. Actually knowing the Bible, and the history of its compilation - works against the marketing. That is why there is a diverse, international group of expert marketers (also known as clergymen), to tell you exactly what they want you to focus on (like faith, making donations, and tithing), and what to ignore (like misogyny, tribal supremacy, and slavery), the way they want you to. At some points and places in Christian medieval Europe - it was actually illegal for a Christian layman to own a Bible in his own language (yes - that's true). The penalty at that time for having a Bible in one's possession was burning at the stake. That's right! True Christians would light your ass up - for owning a Bible!

Serious business.

Students of the Bible, not long after the "First Council of Constantinople (in 360 AD)," began to uncover tremendous historical, constructive, and philosophical problems within the Biblical canon - even at that pre-scientific time. The ecclesiastical powers in place at the time, began to put together and solidify the basic marketing and indoctrinational infrastructure for that time.

The Bible itself was not discussed at the Council, but - how the Christ, and the newly created (at the time) Trinity concept, which is not found in the Bible at all, were to be marketed. Folks, understand... The whole "Trinity" concept is just another great example of clerically sponsored "spiritual thuggery;" nonsense that can be laid on the believing public, because they [the public] generally have little knowledge of the Bible's contents."The Holy Trinity" get-over is a way for spiritual hustlers to "reveal" something that does not exist, and cannot be explained, except "in mystery" by them.

"Mystery" - is a word (in Christianity) that really means: "Something to believe in, but not to know empirically - or make sense of" OK? Trinity? "Three beings in one entity," while existing separately at the same time - while existing as one at the same time - while existing upside-down and right-side up at the same time - while existing in and out at the same time - while existing and not existing at the same time...

Christian marketing at its best.

Now... That great, clerical, marketing discussion that started long ago with "The First Council Of Nicaea (325 AD)" is ongoing folks -

"Jesus is THE PRODUCT!!!" says mega-pastor T.D. Jakes.

And the Bishop is correct -

Jesus IS the product.

So - if Jesus is THE PRODUCT, the question in your mind should be: "Who is selling THE PRODUCT, and towards whom is the target market for THE PRODUCT. Is THE PRODUCT a good PRODUCT, and if I were to purchase THE PRODUCT, what positive and demonstrable BENEFIT would I getfrom utilizing THE PRODUCT, and would THE PRODUCT benefit me, the buyer, to the same obvious and generous degree as THE SELLERS?" Right?

Yeah - I would want to know how much of THE PRODUCT would I need to use, and for what duration would I have to use THE PRODUCT, before THE PRODUCT enables ME as well, to fly around in private jets, drive expensive cars, get extra pussy, and live in multiple mansions too.

That's a "consumer information" request folks - OK?

As you watch the (YouTube) video, notice how Bishop Jakes calmly describes Jesus Christ in commercial - not religious terms, like he is marketing a can of soup (Check the link below). That should tell all motherfuckers SOMETHING right there.

"Salvation?" That's a joke passed around in the clerical locker room.

No church will ever make a serious entreaty for parishioners to: "Read Your Bibles." When they "say" you should - that is just part of the show. Folks actually READING their Bibles - that would not be good for the clergy class in the long run. The great, Christian Marketing Machine knows, that literally - the Bible is a drag (it is really hard to read, and boring). They know that most people won't do it - and that is perfectly fine with them. That is why it is such an accomplishment for those that actually do it. The Bible is the world's bestselling book that people don't read. For many church-going Black Christians - the Holy Bible actually functions as a Sunday fashion accessory.

To show - not to know ("Yes Maam - matching colors are available!").

But the potential downside for the great, Christian Marketing Machine, is that out of those folks that finally (or will) do it, there is a certain significant percentage that will appropriately start asking questions - good questions, for a change.

And the main thing your good pastor does not want you to do is to ask good questions, or to possibly think for yourself, or to attempt any independent research, or to do anything that may potentially increase your non-sectarian, "non-clergyfied" knowledge of the Bible, without that pastor "overseeing" you in some kind of way. Your pastor (or one of his "helpers") prefers to be the one(s) to provide the proper "interpretational guidance" - thereby keeping your inquisitive ass from developing any "devilish notions" that may prompt you to ask "good questions."

"And, why are 'good questions' a problem, Sir?"

"Well - because, 'good questions' potentially destroy bullshit.

Destroyed bullshit potentially causes doubt.

And doubt potentially fucks with church revenues.

OK?"

Black people empty-mindedly hand over hard-earned cash at the rate of $300,000,000 per week to churches. That is 15.6 billion dollars per year, just from us. Now - Black folks, I ask: "Have YOU seen ANY improvement in our fucking communities that is commensurate with a 15.6 billion dollar figure?" I'm not talking about "charity" and "programs" and nigger preachers handing out turkeys to the poor on holidays (I don't accept turkeys from preachers - guess why). OK... And - this is not counting the untold billions that we wastefully spend on "inspirational" literature, gospel music, movies, shows, retreats, Bibles we don't read, and events.

Serious business... Imagine what the Black community would be like if we were actually self-funding Black-owned businesses, banks, think-tanks, Black political interests, housing, culture, facilities and faculty that actually teach us things that we can profitably use in the here and now, and also providing (horrors!!!) community college pools for the education of our children at that same rate. But HEY - Fuck that - paying for the pastor's Bentley, private jet, and extra pussy, is more important than economic self-sufficiency and advanced education for our children.

Right?

That's right!!! The next time any of you big-time tithers are asked by your higher-education aspiring children - why you can't afford to send them to college, just show them a picture of a pussy, and they'll be able to figure it out from there - they will, believe me.

At the same time - all other ethnic groups (meeting on Wednesday nights) are diligently planning, and strategizing and executing, or "taking hold," if you will, of every present and potential business market in the Black community that can be made profitable - while our preacher-leaders (at the Wednesday night "Bible Study") are exhorting US to:

- "Keep your heads to the sky!"

- "Put it in God's hands!"

- "Let Go! Let God!"

- "Seek the Lord!"

- "Let Jesus work it out!"

- "God will provide!"

- "Smoke Hope! Not Dope!"

No wonder we ain't got nothing.

Now...

The "good question" problem is mostly nullified by all of the extra-biblical literature that is available. But the average Christian does not understand that all of this stuff is diversional. It is really slick the way the Christian Marketing Machine does this. This literature is one of the many ways available to keep your eyes off the (entire biblical) text, and to keep you (the layman) focused on those passages that serve the purposes of the church. These fucking ex-texts are usually much more readable, much more anecdotal, much more interesting, and much more entertaining than the Bible (that's the intent folks).

But - you must understand that all of those extra-biblical texts are nothing but interpretational nonsense - stupid shit, only produced for marketing and indoctrinational purposes (your salvation is not on the menu). If you read this bullshit, and really take it to heart, you are actually allowing apologetic hustlers - those "Called By The Lord" con-men (and con-women) to do your thinking for you. Those fucking people have no more insight into the "Mind Of God," or "what God wants you to know" - or do, than you do.

Please.

Any time that those ex-texts deal with any questionable or clearly immoral biblical passages - they will take you for a long-assed walk around the block, and then drop you off - intoxicated and confused, somewhere in the middle of a Chinese desert. When you open your eyes - some bitch will be standing there - attempting to catch your order for egg rolls and fried rice. Most of the guys that write these texts would make excellent criminal defense lawyers. They would - Black clergy and their professional apologist colleagues, are some of the most superb storytellers and liars on the planet. And the Christian Marketing Machine knows, that if large numbers of people actually started reading the entire Bible critically - that will be the sure and immanent death of Christianity. They don't want you to read it.

Not critically, and definitely not entirely.

So people: "Read your Bibles!"

Have you ever noticed that in all the areas of the world that are primarily Christian, the strongest enclaves where "The Faith" is concerned, are always located in the poorest, most fucked-up, and least literate areas? You know - where motherfuckers ain'tgonna read shit. Where education is for "the nerds" - or those who "act white." The low-literacy faithful are just fucking, watching sports, having a bunch of brat babies out of wedlock, stealing Jordans, peddling drugs, gangbanging, and shooting each other, you know - the typical Christian neighborhood. In order for Christianity to continue to prosper, low-literacy and a limited intellect in a layman is far more desirable to the church than having a layman that is unreservedly astute and well-educated.

Understand folks - that Christianity does not prosper as a faith in high-literacy, high-income areas (Notice how hard it is to find churches in ANY of the neighborhoods where mega-pastors live - or in ANY really nice neighborhood. Conversely, the worse the neighborhood - the more churches you will find). You do not find a lot of high-income, high-literacy, scientifically aware, and business savvy white people spending a lot of valuable time IN CHURCH. Whenever you see any of the white one-percenters in church - there is a special non-religious event, a wedding, or some memorial service going on. That's it... You don't find the Bill Gates or Donald Trumps of this world claiming a particular church, or identifying anybody as their "pastor." No buddy - you ain't gonna see those guys "going to church." Even President Obama - during the wild 2008 presidential campaign, had to divest himself of an identifiable church and pastoral relationship, after having to endure the bullshit antics of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. If you will notice - the President has not identified with any particular church or pastor since.

I'm glad the President finally grew-up.

(I do want to make it clear that Christianity in one percentish type - high income neighborhoods DOES necessarily prosper as a STRATEGY piece for the kind of control, political, and marketing purposes that target idiots - not as a FAITH - please understand this, Black people)

In the Black community, you'll find that 45% of all storefronts or other kinds of facilities that were formerly used for commercial purposes that niggers get their hands on, are habitually turned into churches. Building churches is a kind of "fetish" that we Black people possess and nurture (it is almost sexual - maybe that's why so much fucking goes on in churches). I have no idea where it comes from, and that "fetish" is both chronic and ubiquitous: A real, but unavoidable insanity. In many parts of the country, churches are exempt from paying property taxes, water fees, and sewer taxes, thereby eroding the tax base (property taxes in Chicago Illinois are used to fund public education), and strangling resources that local school entities need to educate our children.

The more churches there are in an area, the smaller the tax base. In Black communities nationwide, there is a much larger proportion of our local tax base(s) being eaten-up by churches when you compare us to other communities, in addition to a larger portion of our local taxes being used to subsidize those churches for their sewer and water usage. So that means that believers not only have to subsidize the shit that comes out of the pastor's mouth, through tithing, offerings, and donations - but they also have to subsidize the shit that comes out of the building, where he is talking the shit, through local taxes and fees.

That's some shit - ain't it?

In my town of Chicago Illinois, within upper middle-class and wealthy white neighborhoods, churches are actually torn down (because of low or non use), and replaced with either housing and/or commercial facilities. Those church buildings that have some architectural appeal are re-purposed into condominiums, stores, offices, and recording studios (to cite some recent examples). Thereby - returning them to the tax rolls. In 2012, in a Chicago community known as Portage Park, local merchants actually protested against a local congregation purchasing an old movie theater for the purpose of turning it into a church (the merchants won). Several of those merchants said that the church would erode the tax base, and limit the kinds of businesses that could open within 1000 feet of the church. Let's say, restaurants that serve liquor, for example.

Folks - notice, how between the races, the very different priorities that are in place when it comes to how a structure should be utilized. Whites turn churches into stores - Blacks turn stores into churches.

Did somebody mention a "food desert?" OK.

Sundays are networking and strategy time for the one-percenters, and Wednesday nights are actual working time. We Black folks are at Sunday services, or Wednesday night Bible study - wasting time that is precious and irrecoverable on "faith" activities. Activities that have never moved us forward in the "here and now." Notice the priorities of the typical Black pastor: Not the mitigation of Black on Black crime, not the increase of Black entrepreneurship - no, our biggest community problem is gay marriage, according to Black preachers. See how relevant those motherfuckers are? Dudes - your pastor is solidly on the white man's team. Prayerfully helping the helplessness along. They [preachers] are nothing but evil, lowlife proxies within our communities, making sure white supremacy always wins.

Let me make this position as clear to you as possible:

- Any Black motherfucker that expounds Christianity, Islam (of any ilk), or some such assorted brand of "Israelite-ism," as his profession, is solidly on the white man's team (believe that shit);

- Any sonofabitch, that condiscends to tell YOU that "change" can come from YOU prayerfully putting your hands together (or, psychologically being closed, locked-up, handcuffed and immobilized);

- While having YOU, a human being, falling humbly to your knees (and, thus subconsciously training yourself to become lowly, subservient and vulnerable);

- With YOU looking up - not ahead and around, but UP, and talking to clouds (or, voluntarily allowing yourself to be fucked and suckered into intellectual and deterministic nothingness);

is a liar, a thief, and the ultimate traitor to the Black community. Black clergymen are the internal set-up guys for the white-power structure. Politically abetted community disruptors... And the Bible is their silent, but loudly authoritarian "help meet," wielded to assist him in making and keeping you inert, unquestioning, disorganized, dependent, obedient, and confused, and always assuring that you are perpetually locked-down under the power structure's control.

Watch your wallet.

The pastors always have some fucking "midnight basketball" (which is a cynical joke) for our Black children - not science, business, or culture. Will "midnight basketball" help your son feed his family when he's forty? Now, if it can, then shit, dribble on... Guess what would happen if those same pastors suggested "midnight basketball" for white, Jewish, or Asian children. OK? And we wonder why we as a people, don't own any serious assets or are not able to produce and capitalize on marketable values to the same prosperous degree as others.

Well - we niggers leave that all up to Jesus.

It is understandable though, why clergy are excited and motivated when it comes to building churches. Churches are excellent cash generators for clergy. They provide an extremely high return on investment - for instance: The congregation does not only function as the primary revenue source, but they also serve as a built-in, no-cost, word-of-mouth marketing force (the Jehovah's Witnesses are a good example of this). You also have amateur, semi-professional, and professional musicians, duped into providing wonderful "inspirational music" for free, or near free, under the persuasive flimflammery that they are a, or doing, "a ministry" - and that they are expending their good time and talents "To Serve God." The actual material benefits (in the here and now) that are produced from all this time, effort, and talent being expended, go straight into the pockets of the preacher.

The people that do the work are paid in "salvation."

Maybe that's a good deal? Who knows? In the Black community, not only is the church a great way to make money, but for the pastor, the church also serves as an inexhaustible source of fresh pussy (and fresh dick, in some cases)!

What about learning The Bible? Well - the last Wednesday night "Bible Study" I attended was, in reality, adirty joke played by the pastor on his congregation... That "study" was run by afat bitch with a bad attitude, an extreme stuttering problem, and ablond weave that looked like it needed some attention. The bitch also could have used a good recommendation for a stronger brand of deodorant. Not only did she stutter mightily through the class (I wanted to choke her ass), but SHE did not know what the fuck she was talking about - and our actual "study" was reduced to reading some bullshit "class" materials generated by the central office of that church's denomination. No actual biblical discussion was allowed, and all hard questions were brushed-off, or wiped-away with: "You need more faith!"

"Is that so..?"

Now - for Black folks - mainly, the presentation, the impressiveness of the church venue, the quality of the music, the preaching STYLE, and the attractiveness of the pastor (charisma), is much more important than the actual veracity and content of what is preached, or that whether what is being preached is moving us forward in the here and now. You don't have to understand shit - FAITH is the most important thing. And as far as faith-reinforcing literature produced by the church or denomination they may belong to, Black folks never bother (or are afraid) to ask motherfuckers: "How did the writers of this literature get their information?" Zero inquiry from us. And, quite incredibly, Black folks wonder why we are so behind on everything.

Well - this is the shit that we are running on.

One day we'll get it.

If you do decide to do independent research, be sure to use scholarly materials that are produced by universities and Biblical experts that have no denominational bent or sponsorship. And use the Bible itself as the core reference - but ignore any footnotes within (the footnotes are usually sectarian). Use only secular-sourced reference books. The bullshit stuff that is produced by mega-pastors, evangelists, denominations (like Jehovah's Witnesses), individual spiritual hustlers, palm-readers, and "transcendentalists," is nothing but good marketing. You will not learn anything - and you will waste a lot of money.

When you buy a book "written" by a mega-church pastor, you are not purchasing anything that will help you spiritually, or in any other way - all you are doing is paying for jet fuel. That's it. Think about it, the only book that a mega-pastor could possibly write, that could help you to the same degree that "God" is helping him - is for him to write an honest book on how to become a mega-church pastor. Shit, I'll read that book... Have you seen it? No? And you won't. Critically reading your Bible, and doing your own thinking is the first step you can take to stop being a bitch for your pastor, taking it up the ass for the Christian Marketing Machine - and finally becoming your own, solid, and independently thinking person.